Hertz' AI System That Scans for "Damage" on Rental Cars Is Turning Into an Epic Disaster
Technology
163
Beiträge
92
Kommentatoren
2.5k
Aufrufe
-
It's the same lane moron. It can be both imperfect and also nothing wrong with it.
Given that it’s not solving the problem it was implemented to solve, there is something wrong with it. AI is garbage, you can’t change my mind
-
The technology isn't there to accurately assess damage. It's there to give Hertz an excuse to charge you extra money. It's working exactly as the ghouls in the C-suite like.
It’s the guise of customer service sure, yeah
-
Never rent a car from Hertz, check.
Hertz has also called the cops on their customers for a variety of asinine reasons.
I steer clear of them and Enterprise (Enterprise has been working the whole shaft for ICE).
-
Too many people these days don't use or have access to credit cards for services like this. Many people I know only use bank debit cards, or worse, use the debit preloaded cash cards issued by their employers' payroll service provider.
Credit cards motivate banks to help you, because if you won't pay, and the business doesn't pay, the bank has to take the hit.
Debit cards will work as well if your bank values it's reputation - but not all banks do.
And I would not trust a preloaded card provider to assist. You are neither their business partner nor their customer and that puts your interests at the bottom of a very long list. You have to hope some law is on your side or that your issue is so trivial that resolving it is more cost effective then dealing with you.
You CAN dispute debit card charges, but the process is typically done through the vendor of the card, CPI or Fiserv. Contact your bank.
-
Stop light analogy is completely unequivocal
You’re admitting the technology is in fact flawed if you think it needed to be implemented with supervision. An uno reverse is, every set of traffic lights needs a traffic controller to stop drivers running red lights. Unequivocal, right?
Just stop because you’re wrong, lol
You’re admitting the technology is in fact flawed if you think it needed to be implemented with supervision.
You're absolutely right. The technology isn't perfect if it needs to be implemented with supervision, but it can be good enough to have a role in everyday society.
Great examples are self checkout lanes, where there's always an employee watching, and speed cameras, which always have an officer reviewing and signing off on tickets.
An uno reverse is, every set of traffic lights needs a traffic controller to stop drivers running red lights.
Traffic lights are meant to direct traffic. Yet you don't expect them to prevent folks from running red lights. Folks don't expect them to, because that's not their role in their implementation - they are meant to be used alongside folks who will enforce traffic laws, and, maybe in fact, traffic controllers. This is arguably an example of an implementation done right.
This technology is meant to flag car damage. If there was a correct implementation, I would be able to say "folks don't expect them to be perfect, because that's not their role in their implementation - they are meant to be used alongside employees trained to verify damage exists, who can correct the algorithm if needed", but the implementation in this case is sadly bad.
At the end of the day, you will never have a "perfect" computer vision algorithm. But you can have many "good enough" ones, depending on how they're implemented.
-
It’s doing neither
If you think so, then you should argue that point instead of trying to short-circuit the argument by being pedantic about a logical inconsistency.
-
Given that it’s not solving the problem it was implemented to solve, there is something wrong with it. AI is garbage, you can’t change my mind
It's not solving the problem because it's not being implemented properly. If you take a hammer and smash it into the the medium over and over again instead of hitting the nail, is that the hammer's fault or yours?
-
But sometimes the nicer packaged product is better, it depends on the product.
And often times it isn't. In fact, name-brand can ofter be worse for a multitude of reasons.
-
And often times it isn't. In fact, name-brand can ofter be worse for a multitude of reasons.
I'm interested in examples of when name-brand is worse quality, but yes, name-brand isn't always objectively better, and is often produced in the same facility.
As usual, it depends, so don't knee-jerk to all one or the other, if it matters to you, compare the packaging (it'll say where it was produced, so you can guess when it's the same product).
-
You CAN dispute debit card charges, but the process is typically done through the vendor of the card, CPI or Fiserv. Contact your bank.
Yes. I agree - on paper all three have a chargeback process that appear similar enough. However, assuming you aren't a financial expert who never needs help, I'm discussing the behind the front politics at play and each group's motivations to go above and beyond.
-
Except they are using computer vision, not an LLM
And what is processing that information?
-
Use Turo. You can rent basic or fun/interesting cars directly from the owners.
Oh yay another bullshit thing. No thanks.
-
I use an app called GoMore in some places in Europe that allows you to rent cars from other peers. The rental process is cheaper and faster--everything is done through the app--and you avoid these shady corpo practices.
For now till the shit that happens with Airbnb happens there. With the corporations just renting all the cars.
-
Sometimes it's made with lower quality ingredients at the same factory, sometimes it's equivalent.
Some might be lower but some would be the same.
-
I think it's generally a brilliant solution but there are a couple of problems here:
- The scanner seems to flag fucking everything and charge for minor damage where a human would probably flag it as wear.
- No one is allowed to correct the scanner:
Perturbed by the apparent mistake, the user tried to speak to employees and managers at the Hertz counter, but none were able to help, and all "pointed fingers at the 'AI scanner.'" They were told to contact customer support — but even that proved futile after representatives claimed they "can’t do anything."
Sounds to me like they're just trying to replace those employees. That's why they won't let them interfere.
You are spot on here. AI is great for sensitivity (noticing potential issues), but terrible for specivity (giving many false positives).
The issue is how AI is used, not the AI itself. They don't have a human in the checking process. They should use AI scanner to check the car. If it's fine, then you have saved the employee from manually checking, which is a time-consuming process and prone to error.
If the AI spots something, then get an employee to look at the issues highlighted. If it's just a water drop or other false positive, then it should be a one click 'ignore', and the customer goes on their way without charge. If it is genuine, then show the evidence to the customer and discuss charges in person. Company still saves time over a manual check and has much improved accuracy and evidence collection.
They are being greedy by trying to eliminate the employee altogether. This probably doesn't actually save any money, if anything it costs more in dealing with complaints, not to mention the loss of sales due to building a poor image.
-
Too many people these days don't use or have access to credit cards for services like this. Many people I know only use bank debit cards, or worse, use the debit preloaded cash cards issued by their employers' payroll service provider.
Credit cards motivate banks to help you, because if you won't pay, and the business doesn't pay, the bank has to take the hit.
Debit cards will work as well if your bank values it's reputation - but not all banks do.
And I would not trust a preloaded card provider to assist. You are neither their business partner nor their customer and that puts your interests at the bottom of a very long list. You have to hope some law is on your side or that your issue is so trivial that resolving it is more cost effective then dealing with you.
in this case, hertz doesn't rent to who doesn't have a credit card
debit = no rent
-
Virtually any place that accepts a credit card will accept debit cards, too. Actually, most debit cards can be processed as credit cards. The comment you responded to simply highlighted that this trick is much easier to pull with credit card than a debit card, as the creditor hasn't yet been repaid for the credit issued.
it's because with credit cards they can check the credit limit, then be sure that the card can pay the insurance deductible in case of crash
instead with debit i can rent a car, close or deativate the card, crash/total the rental car and then avoid paying any extra fee
most rentals don't rent with debit cards because they want to be sure, and who accepts debit:
- they preauthorize thousands of dollars instead of hundreds
- they only rent the lowest end of the available cars
-
Oh, so Hertz has gotten wise to... every online platform that exists: Outsourcing all responsibility for their user-hostile bullshit to some vague "system" that cannot be held accountable.
I'm so sorry but the advertised cost has doubled because... Computer says so! No, sir, there's nothing I can do, sir, you see it's the system.
And you can't go anywhere else, because everyone else is doing it (or soon will be) too!
Oh, this is a thing. It's called an accountability sink.
There is a really interesting book called the unaccountability machine by Rory Sutherland (if my memory is working). Worth a read
-
And what is processing that information?
Computer vision commonly uses convolutional neural networks on the input, which is different from the transformer neural networks used in LLMs. If you have more info indicating LLMs are used here please share
-
in this case, hertz doesn't rent to who doesn't have a credit card
debit = no rent
I should have remembered that. I had to lend my card out to my friend who was in a credit lock at the time they needed a rental. Still, I don't think my advice is invalid, just irrelevant here.
